Show all posts by user

Good question. I would like to hear some opinions on this too.
The ideal situation is serving content at fulll speed from the squid cache. But content that has to be retrieved from the net first, has to be handled by BWM.
When the browser requests a page, BWM forwards the request to Squid port 3128. Squid then looks for content in the cache, if there is, the content will not be retrieved from

That's easy, there is an option to allow full speed for lan trafic. If I remember correctly, you can find it under options-LAN. You can define the IP range.
All non-lan (internet) traffic is still limited, don't worry.
Edit: I just saw that Andrew answered your question in another topic.
Cheers,
Alacran.

No, it's not a bug.
This might happen if you have a Realtek-based network card. Try using older drivers.
I had this problem with an Asus P5K board with onboard dual lan, one Marvell and one Realtek.
When starting the computer, it took a long time for the network connections to appear, and when they were ready, in BWM the bridge was gone and the rules were reset to "any interface".
I

Just make it a SBM bridge and put it in the same ip range as your "providers" router. Then configure that router as the gateway for your clients.
The internal and external network cards will have an IP in the same range. You may have to add a static route on the server.
DNS is the least to worry about, I recommend using static IP's, and as DNS you can use the routers IP or use some ot

I think it's impossible to do that with ICS from Microsoft windows. I did it in the past with Midpoint, it does nat & proxy and has a usefull option named "connection teaming". I guess that's what you are after.
Midpoint is from Midcore Software. Homepage is down at the moment, but you'll find enough resources on the web.
Cheers,
Arthur.

Thanks Lucas, worked like a charm. I changed the "localhost" to the router IP and activated the "block all" rule.
All clients got their IP based on the static DHCP list in the router.
Clients not in the static DHCP list will get an IP in another range, and that range is blocked by the BWM block rule.
Lucas, Hanewin dhcp server is amazing indeed. Nifty little program with

Hi Lucas,
Thank you very much, now I understand how dhcp works, port 67 is the port the dhcp server listens on, and it send on port 68. The protocol is UDP.
I have one question:
You say destination "localhost" but my router is the DHCP server, not the BWM system (localhost).
The router has IP 192.168.1.50, shouldn't that be the destination?
I will create the rule and post back

Well I had it all worked out, at least it seemed.
I have a normal ruleset, from IP 192.168.1.2 until 192.168.1.49.
Router is at 192.168.1.50. Setup is simple, cable modem > router > server with BWM > switch with clients connected.
At first, I worked only with static IP all was well.
But I needed some blocking rule to prevent unauthorized access. So I made the following rule at t

This is something we requested to be implemented in a feature version of BWM. I've seen this question come along quite a lot on the forum.
Hope Andrew can implement this soon.
For now you will have to create a rule for each client.

Hi Dave,
Indeed, BWM can work with MAC addresses. You will be quite pleased wit BWM, as I have a similar setup here and this software made all the difference.
You can set time windows, limit p2p, penalize large transfers and so on.
Just make sure your bwm box is between the target network and the internet connection. Other networks, directly connected to the router are not affected by the u

Hi Mir,
That is normal behaviour. If yo create a group, the bandwidth will be shared by that group.
If you want to limit each IP to max. 128K, you would have to create a rule for every ip address.
I remember there is a feature request for the new version, create a group and give EACH of the ip's in the group an evenly part of the bandwidth available for that group.
However, I don't know

Thanks Andrew, that works.
Only downside to this rule 2 is that all http (port 80) traffic is at the same speed for all users.
Localhost is Squid in this case, and it is throttled to the same speed no matter the client that requests the content. BWM only sees the localhost on the WAN side.
That could be something to think about. I've got users on my network with different speed limits, there

That's good work, Andrew. Your support is unique, few devs go beyond supporting their own product.
I have one question.
I would like to serve content from the Squid cache without limit to my users.
Goal is to make more efficient use of the internet connection, we've achieved that already with squid.
But content served from the cache may go at full speed.
I've seen a rule to uncap the lan

Harry, you can substitute your public ip for something else, but it is important you post your ruleset and your squid config.
I did ask you this before but never got any reply.
If you want us to help, you need to be as specific as posible.
Arthur.

Harry, I'll try to help you but you need to be more specific about the problem. Exactly at what point are you having problems?
I doubt Softperfect will create a FAQ. Squid has nothing to do with BWM so it seems logical to me that Andrew doesn't provide support for it.
Any help you receive from the forum members on Squid specific questions will be off-topic but I don't think it's a problem.
S

That's ok Andrew, after all the static route was your idea so you did help me out.
If the server cannot access the internet, neither can Squid so that was the reason it didn't work at first.
Looking forward to the new version.
Cheers
Arthur.

I'll post this explanation here because there are a lot of people who couldn't get the BWM bridge working properly.
Main problem is the loss of internet connectivity on the server (gateway) itself, and the inability to use Squid in combination with BWM in bridge mode on Microsoft Windows.
First part: Setting up the bridge.
This information was taken from
The bridge will function without

At last I managed to solve this. Got it working 100% exactly how I wanted it. I'll post the solution in a new topic, because there was something else going on that needs to be explained first. I've seen this problem posted here several times, but no solution was given until today.

Hi Lucas,
Was just looking at Winroute, my first impression is that Kerio is a very complete solution. It has a firewall, proxy, bandwidth limiter and other nice features. I understand that you do not use the proxy part, so you are using the firewall and the internet sharing NAT component.
I could try this as a last resort, I know the Softperfect bridge is giving me problems so I might be

Done some changes:
Configured the lan side with the correct IP address. Now both cards on the bridge aro on the same subnet. Lost internet on the gateway machine, but for the sake of testing it didn't matter. Tried to activate mapping again, no change. Could not find remote server while browsing.
When BWM bridges the network cards, they loose their properties. I tried to ping any of the tw

That is correct Shunt, but I'm updating from older versions that didn't support async. upload and downloads. I've got to change all the rules to one rule only - format. But that is something not so urgent, first I have to get the port mapping and proxy going.
I would like to add something, just did another test.
My gateway has three network cards. You could call it multi-homed.
One ethernet